The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked principal bench of Armed Force Tribunal to adjudicate the pleas of Navy officers, who have challenged rejection of their claim for Permanent Commission (PC) and grant of pensionary benefits saying "we as a national institution have to follow hierarchy of law".
The top court said that the principle of law which has been laid by it for grant of permanent commission to women officers in Army and Navy, will equally apply to the male officers as well and there will be no discrimination.
A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and M R Shah, while hearing a batch of plea, said that the Armed Force Tribunal (AFT) will adjudicate all the applications made by both male and women officers by October 31.
The bench said, "You all can always come to the Supreme Court, if you are not satisfied with the redressal of grievance by the AFT. We cannot entertain individual cases under Article 32 of the Constitution, especially when the Supreme Court has laid the principle of law. We as a national institution have to follow the hierarchy of law".
The top court said it agrees with the submissions of senior counsels for the Navy officers that these are "weighty issues" but the question is whether the Supreme Court opens its door for entertaining these individual cases under Article 32.
"We will continue your interim protection granted by earlier orders and request the AFT to decide these applications expeditiously. The Supreme Court should consider the fall out of its decisions. We should be consistent in our findings and follow the discipline of law," the bench said.
It directed that applications related to permanent commission already filed in various branches of AFT should be consolidated and transferred to the principal bench of AFT in Delhi.
In a batch of petitions, which were taken up for hearing on Tuesday, the bench noted that 18 Navy officers have challenged the rejection of their claim for permanent commission and in the alternate they have sought grant of pensionary benefits.
The top court said that its verdicts in Army and Navy matters related to permanent commission were appeals from the high court and they were not petitions filed under Article 32.
Senior advocate CU Singh, appearing for three officers, said that they have been discriminated against after the top court's verdict and these officers, who are meritorious, were not considered for grant of permanent commission.
He said that these officers are left high and dry as they were not even allowed to join the civilian administration on the ground that the petition is pending before the top court.
Similarly, senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, appearing for some officers said that there was discrimination in grant of pensionary benefits as the top court had invoked Article 142 to grant such benefits to women Navy officers in its verdict.
He said that now the Navy is saying that the order for grant of pension was only for women officers and not men, who were from the same cadre.
On March 17, the top court had said that there can't be "101 excuses" to deny women in the military equal rights and cleared the decks for granting permanent commission to women officers in the Navy and asked the Centre to work out the modalities in three months.
In a landmark verdict for gender equality, the top court had held that a level playing field ensures that women have the opportunity to overcome "histories of discrimination", as it cited the achievements of women Navy officers, including those serving on-board the INS Jyoti warship.
The top court had said that all the SSC officers in the education, law and logistics cadres of the Navy, who are presently in service, shall be considered for the grant of permanent commissions (PCs).
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
